[flagged]
So if the author recommended software that you loved and used everyday you would stop using that software?
Even broken clock is right twice a day so no.
You mistake dismiss with "do opposite"
Why use OpenBSD?
21–30 of 106 posts
Re: Why use OpenBSD?
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
AI? I may be missing something. You are talking about whom here? The blog author?
GP is referring to the LLM crawler captcha thing. The one with the anime girls in it. It only took a few seconds on my phone, but it's slow on my old ThinkPad.
it took tens of seconds to load, once it loaded it was quick
And the point of "why waste time for captcha for static file" still stands, it's not like there is comment section for bots to abuse
Re: Why use OpenBSD?
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well - I would recommend using a better linux distribution than Ubuntu. I run just lighttpd these days; used to run httpd before they decided the configuration must become even more complicated. I don't have any issues with lighttpd (admittedly only few people use it; most seem to now use nginx).
And which distribution would that be?
Debian
Re: Why use OpenBSD?
#24One of the reasons why I'm using OpenBSD is because it passes what I think of as a litmus test for FLOSS software: can I build the whole thing from scratch, in a short time and with minimal fuss? In the case of OpenBSD, the answer is yes. I can install it on a new machine, fetch the source code from mirrors, do some edits to the source, build a fresh release, write it to a USB stick and boot it on another machine. On…
Buildroot does exactly that and it gives you big TUI menu to pick what you want included in your linux image
Re: Why use OpenBSD?
#25I built my last company on OpenBSD. It was easy to understand the entire system, and secure-by-default (everything disabled) is the right posture for servers. Pledge and unveil worked brilliantly to restrict our Go processes to specific syscall sets and files. The firewall on OpenBSD is miles better to configure than iptables. I never had challenges upgrading them--they just kept working for years.
Re: Why use OpenBSD?
#26Re: Why use OpenBSD?
#27Servers I setup in openbsd just keep working, and are an easy patch/upgrade process. Servers I setup in Ubuntu break and have weird patching issues. Maybe it's something I'm doing, but I sure do like that OpenBSD seems a lot easier to just have solid and work indefinitely.
Well - I would recommend using a better linux distribution than Ubuntu. I run just lighttpd these days; used to run httpd before they decided the configuration must become even more complicated. I don't have any issues with lighttpd (admittedly only few people use it; most seem to now use nginx).
Ubuntu seems to have a trend of taking something that works under Debian and somehow messing that up. Upgrades are one thing but for a while we had separate instruction on how to make Yubikey tokens work under each version of Ubuntu (we used them as smartcards for SSH key auth), while Debian instructions stayed the same...
Update was also hit and miss on user's desktop machines, for a while ubuntu had a nasty habit of installing new kernel upgrades... without removing old ones, which eventually made boot run out of space and poor user usually had to give it to helpdesk to fix.
Tho tbh most of the problems in any distro with packages is "an user installed 3rd party repo that don't have well structured packages and it got messy".
Re: Why use OpenBSD?
#28To be honest I don't really see a reason to use a *BSD system myself other than just for the sake of using something different and less mainstream. FreeBSD had some advantages in the past but nowadays Linux has caught up in features.
BSD license so you don't have to upstream your stuff would be one. Tho it's not an advantage to *BSD systems, Linux near-forcing vendors to go mainline (as keeping separate kernel tree is PITA) did a lot of good in hardware support.
Re: Why use OpenBSD?
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
What Linux has is mostly better hardware support and on gnome and some distributions they have a software installation tool that look like an app store but that's about it... Everything else is pretty much the same, random people wouldn't figure out a system is freebsd instead of Linux when running same desktop (like plasma).
The license makes it very different philosophically.
Which is what makes Linux kernel stand out, as we can see by Sony and Apple contributions upstream.
Had BSD not been busy with AT&T lawsuit, all major UNIXes would probably still be around, consuming whatever was produced out of BSD like the networking code and OS IPC improvements over AT&T UNIX.
Instead sponsoring Linux kernel became the plan B, as means to reduce their UNIX development costs.
> Commercial use began when Dell and IBM, followed by Hewlett-Packard, started offering Linux support to escape Microsoft's monopoly in the desktop operating system market
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux
> 1998: Many major companies such as IBM, Compaq and Oracle announce their support for Linux.
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Linux
Ironically the major contributor to many GNU/Linux critical components, Red-Hat, is now an IBM subsiduary, recouping that investment beyond doing only Aix.
It is no accident that all FOSS OSes that came after Linux, none of them has adopted GPL, as big corporations would rather not be obliged by it.
Re: Why use OpenBSD?
#30I built my last company on OpenBSD. It was easy to understand the entire system, and secure-by-default (everything disabled) is the right posture for servers. Pledge and unveil worked brilliantly to restrict our Go processes to specific syscall sets and files. The firewall on OpenBSD is miles better to configure than iptables. I never had challenges upgrading them--they just kept working for years.
Finally Linux has something that approaches pledge/unveil: landlock.
Seccomp was never actually usable: https://blog.habets.se/2022/03/seccomp-unsafe-at-any-speed.h...